...
首页> 外文期刊>Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy: official journal of the ESSKA >Prospective randomized clinical comparison of femoral transfixation versus bioscrew fixation in hamstring tendon ACL reconstruction--a preliminary report.
【24h】

Prospective randomized clinical comparison of femoral transfixation versus bioscrew fixation in hamstring tendon ACL reconstruction--a preliminary report.

机译:绳肌腱ACL重建中股骨固定与生物螺钉固定的前瞻性随机临床比较-初步报告。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to clinically evaluate hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-reconstruction using femoral fixation with bioresorbable interference screws and with a bioresorbable transfixation device. HYPOTHESIS: The ACL-reconstruction using the transfixation device at the femoral side leads to less knee laxity and therefore to a better clinical outcome for the patient. TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective randomized clinical outcome study. METHODS: From February 2002 to December 2002, a total of 68 patients with hamstring ACL reconstruction using a femoral fixation once with TransFix (n=38; m:22 and f:16; median age=28.5 range 15-47) and the second with bioscrew (BS) (n=30; m:20, f:10; median age=25.5 range 13-61) completed the follow-up period. Patients in each group got a clinical assessment at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The measurement of anterior translation of the tibia has been performed using the Rolimeter device. RESULTS: No significant differences in the knee laxity testing using the Rolimeter device were seen between both groups and over time within these groups. Ninety percent of all patients had functionally normal or near normal International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) knee ligament ratings. The TF-group included 17 grade A, 19 grade B, and 2 grade C knees, and the BS-group had 12 grade A, 13 grade B, and 5 grade C knees. The IKDC rating, the OAK-score, the Tegner-activity-score, and the Lysholm-score did not show significant differences between the TF-group and the BS-group. CONCLUSION: We disproved our hypothesis that the transfixation technique leads to less laxity and therefore to a better clinical outcome when compared to the use of BS. The clinical results in this study clarified that this technique is an effective and safe method for femoral hamstring fixation in ACL-reconstruction. However, this technique revealed no advantage compared to the bioscrew fixation technique within the short-term follow-up.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是通过股骨固定,生物可吸收性干扰螺钉和生物可吸收性固定装置,对绳肌腱前交叉韧带(ACL)的重建进行临床评估。假设:使用股骨侧固定装置进行ACL重建可减少膝关节松弛,从而为患者带来更好的临床效果。研究类型:前瞻性随机临床结果研究。方法:从2002年2月至2002年12月,共68例使用股骨固定术行股骨固定的绳肌ACL重建患者(n = 38; m:22和f:16;中位年龄= 28.5,范围15-47),第二例使用生物螺钉(BS)(n = 30; m:20,f:10;中位年龄= 25.5,范围13-61)完成了随访期。每组患者在术后3、6和12个月接受临床评估。胫骨前移的测量已使用Rolimeter设备进行。结果:两组之间以及随着时间的推移,使用Rolimeter装置进行的膝关节松弛测试均未见明显差异。在所有患者中,有90%的患者的功能正常或接近正常,国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)的膝关节韧带评分。 TF组包括17个A级膝盖,19个B级膝盖和2个C级膝盖,而BS组则具有12个A级膝盖,13个B级膝盖和5个C级膝盖。 IKDC评分,OAK评分,Tegner活性评分和Lysholm评分在TF组和BS组之间没有显着差异。结论:我们反对我们的假设,即与BS相比,固定技术可减少松弛,并因此获得更好的临床结果。这项研究的临床结果表明,该技术是一种在ACL重建中进行股骨string绳固定术的安全有效方法。但是,在短期随访中,与生物螺钉固定技术相比,该技术没有任何优势。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号